Comparative effectiveness of tocilizumab with either methotrexate or leflunomide in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Narvaez J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4382296 | biostudies-other | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionControlled clinical studies have shown that the efficacy of tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy is superior to that of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) monotherapy and comparable to that of TCZ plus methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study compared the real-world effectiveness of TCZ monotherapy vs. TNFis plus MTX in US patients with RA.MethodsTCZ-naïve patients from the Corrona RA registry with prior exposure to ≥ 1 TNFi who initiated TCZ monotherapy or TNFi + MTX were included. Outcomes included mean change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), achievement of low disease activity (LDA; CDAI ≤ 10), achievement of modified American College of Rheumatology (mACR) 20/50 responses, and mean change in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) at 6 months. Patients initiating TNFi + MTX were grouped by MTX dose (≤ 10 mg; > 10 to ≤ 15 mg; > 15 to ≤ 20 mg; > 20 mg); outcomes in each group were compared with TCZ monotherapy using trimmed populations (excluding patients outside the propensity score distribution overlap).ResultsPatients in all groups experienced improvement in CDAI at 6 months (mean change, - 6.9 to - 9.7), with no significant differences between the TCZ monotherapy and TNFi + MTX groups. Achievement of LDA and mACR responses at 6 months were comparable between the TCZ monotherapy and TNFi + MTX groups; overall, 26.8-38.0% of patients achieved LDA, 24.3-37.6% achieved mACR20 response and 13.2-20.8% achieved mACR50 response. The mean change in mHAQ at 6 months was - 0.1 in all groups.ConclusionsIn this real-world population of US patients with RA who had prior TNFi exposure, there was no evidence of a difference in the effectiveness of TCZ monotherapy compared with that of TNFi + MTX, regardless of MTX dose, at 6 months for improving RA disease activity.FundingCorrona, LLC. Plain language summary available for this article.
| S-EPMC6251839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWe identified silent liver fibrosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using transient elastography, and investigated medication that correlated with abnormal liver stiffness measurement (LSM) values.MethodsWe consecutively enrolled 105 patients with RA taking methotrexate over 24 weeks with normal liver functions and no history of underlying chronic liver disease. Blood tests were performed, and body mass index and metabolic syndrome were assessed. We checked LSM values, and adopted 5.3 kPa as the cutoff for abnormal LSM values. The cumulative doses of medications including methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, prednisolone, meloxicam, and celecoxib were calculated.ResultsThe median age of patients (20 men and 85 women) was 52.4 years. The median LSM value was 4.7 kPa and 24 (22.9%) patients had abnormal LSM values. Gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase levels and the cumulative doses of leflunomide and prednisolone significantly correlated with LSM values (P<0.05). The cumulative dose of leflunomide, but not methotrexate, was significantly higher in patients with abnormal LSM values than that in patients with normal LSM values (P = 0.008). When RA patients receiving leflunomide plus methotrexate were classified into two groups according to the optimal cutoff cumulative dose of leflunomide (19,170 mg), abnormal LSM values were more frequently identified in patients with high cumulative dose of leflunomide (odds ratio, 12.750; P<0.001).ConclusionsThe cumulative dose of leflunomide was the only independent predictor of abnormal LSM values in patients with RA who had received methotrexate for more than six months.
| S-EPMC3580544 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess whether it is better to intensively treat all patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using combinations of drugs or to reserve this approach for patients who do not have an appropriate response (as determined by a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-ESR] of ? 3.2 at week 24) to methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy, and to assess whether combination therapy with MTX plus etanercept is superior to the combination of MTX plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine.The Treatment of Early Aggressive Rheumatoid Arthritis (TEAR) study is a 2-year, randomized, double-blind trial. A 2 × 2 factorial design was used to randomly assign subjects to 1 of 4 treatment arms: immediate treatment with MTX plus etanercept, immediate oral triple therapy (MTX plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine), or step-up from MTX monotherapy to one of the combination therapies (MTX plus etanercept or MTX plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine) at week 24 if the DAS28-ESR was ? 3.2. All treatment arms included matching placebos. The primary outcome was an observed-group analysis of DAS28-ESR values from week 48 to week 102.At week 24 (beginning of the step-up period), subjects in the 2 immediate-treatment groups demonstrated a greater reduction in the DAS28-ESR compared with those in the 2 step-up groups (3.6 versus 4.2; P < 0.0001); no differences between the combination-therapy regimens were observed. Between week 48 and week 102, subjects randomized to the step-up arms had a DAS28-ESR clinical response that was not different from that of subjects who initially received combination therapy, regardless of the treatment arm. There was no significant difference in the DAS28-ESR between subjects randomized to oral triple therapy and those randomized to receive MTX plus etanercept. By week 102, there was a statistically significant difference in the change in radiographic measurements from baseline between the group receiving MTX plus etanercept and the group receiving oral triple therapy (0.64 versus 1.69; P = 0.047).There were no differences in the mean DAS28-ESR during weeks 48-102 between subjects randomized to receive MTX plus etanercept and those randomized to triple therapy, regardless of whether they received immediate combination treatment or step-up from MTX monotherapy. At 102 weeks, immediate combination treatment with either strategy was more effective than MTX monotherapy prior to the initiation of step-up therapy. Initial use of MTX monotherapy with the addition of sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine (or etanercept, if necessary, after 6 months) is a reasonable therapeutic strategy for patients with early RA. Treatment with the combination of MTX plus etanercept resulted in a statistically significant radiographic benefit compared with oral triple therapy.
| S-EPMC4036119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince receiving a positive recommendation in England, Wales and Scotland, tocilizumab (TCZ) is one of the options available to clinicians for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in the UK.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of adding TCZ to the current treatment sequence of RA patients from a UK payer's perspective over a patient lifetime horizon.MethodsAn individual sampling model was developed to synthesise all clinical and economic inputs. Two scenarios were explored separately: patients contraindicated to methotrexate (MTX) and those MTX tolerant. For each scenario, the analysis compared three strategies. The standard of care (SoC) strategy included a sequence of the most commonly prescribed biologics; the other two comparator strategies considered the addition of TCZ to SoC at first line and second line. Patient characteristics were representative of UK patients. Treatment efficacy and quality-of-life evidence were synthesised from clinical trials and secondary sources. An analysis of a patient registry informed the model parameters regarding treatment discontinuation. The safety profile of all treatments in a given strategy was based on a network meta-analysis and literature review. Resource utilisation, treatment acquisition, administration, monitoring and adverse event treatment costs were considered. All costs reflect 2012 prices. Uncertainty in model parameters was explored by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ResultsIn the MTX-contraindicated population, if TCZ was added to the SoC in first line, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £7,300 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained; if added in second line, the estimated ICER was £11,400 per QALY. In the MTX-tolerant population, the estimated costs and QALYs of the TCZ strategy were similar to those of the SoC strategy. Sensitivity analysis showed that parameters that affect the treatment cost (such as patient weight) can have a noticeable impact on the overall cost-effectiveness results. The majority of the other sensitivity analyses resulted in modest changes to the ICER.ConclusionFor the treatment of RA in MTX-tolerant and contraindicated patients, the addition of TCZ to the SoC was estimated to be a cost-effective strategy.
| S-EPMC4113684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic inflammatory disease characterized by joint pain, swelling, stiffness, and progressive destruction of the small joints of the hands and feet. Treatment of RA has improved over the past decade. With multiple cytokines well-known now to play a role in the pathogenesis of RA, including tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin (IL)-1?, and IL-6, many targeted biological treatments against these cytokines have emerged, changing the treatment of this disease. Tocilizumab (TCZ) is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against the IL-6 receptor and has been approved in many countries, including the United States, for the treatment of moderate to severe RA in patients who have not adequately responded to one or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or cannot tolerate other approved drug classes for RA. The aim of this review is to discuss the role of IL-6 in RA, and to provide an overview of the mode of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of TCZ. Furthermore, efficacy studies of TCZ as both monotherapy and combination therapy will be evaluated. There have been several important clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of TCZ in RA patients; this review summarizes this data from 14 key trials with emphasis on Phase III trials. Review of these trials provides strong evidence that its use, both as monotherapy and in combination with methotrexate or other DMARDs, is an effective treatment in reducing the signs and symptoms of RA. TCZ showed tolerable safety but care is required for its use since there are some important safety concerns including elevated liver enzymes, elevated low-density lipoprotein, infections, and gastrointestinal perforations. Additionally, given the efficacy of TCZ in the treatment of RA, this review discusses how TCZ may be beneficial in the treatment of other autoimmune diseases, spinal disease, cardiovascular disease, organ transplantation, and malignancies where elevated levels of IL-6 may play a role in the pathogenesis of these diseases.
| S-EPMC3974690 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: We sought to identify immunoglobin G autoantibodies predictive of early treatment response to methotrexate, the recommended first-line therapy for patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, and to the interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor biologic tocilizumab, initiated as the first disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug.Materials and methods: In baseline sera of a subset of patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis in the U-Act-Early study, selected based on specific responder/non-responder criteria using the Disease Activity Score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) within the first 20 weeks, we measured immunoglobin G antibody reactivity against 463 protein antigens and performed supervised cluster analysis to identify predictive autoantibodies for treatment response. The analysis subset comprised 56 patients in the methotrexate arm (22 responders, 34 non-responders) and 50 patients in the tocilizumab arm (34 responders, 16 non-responders). For comparison, these analyses were also performed in 50 age- and gender-matched healthy controls.Results: Increased reactivity in responders versus non-responders was found in the methotrexate arm against two antigens-DOT1-like histone lysine methyltransferase (p = 0.009) and tropomyosin (p = 0.003)-and in the tocilizumab arm against one antigen-neuro-oncological ventral antigen 2 (p = 0.039). Decreased reactivity was detected against two antigens in the methotrexate arm-G1 to S phase transition 2 (p = 0.023) and the zinc finger protein ZPR1 (p = 0.021). Reactivity against the identified antigens was not statistically significant in either treatment arm for patients with rheumatoid factor-positive versus-negative or anti-cyclic citrullinated test-positive versus test-negative rheumatoid arthritis (p ? 0.06).Conclusions: Comprehensive profiling of baseline sera revealed several novel immunoglobin G autoantibodies associated with early treatment response to methotrexate and to tocilizumab in disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis. These findings could eventually yield clinically relevant predictive markers, if corroborated in different patient cohorts, and may facilitate future benefit in personalised healthcare.
| S-EPMC7728181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo quantify rheumatologists' beliefs about the effectiveness of triple therapy (MTX + HCQ + SSZ) and other commonly used initial treatments for RA.MethodsIn a Bayesian belief elicitation exercise, 40 rheumatologists distributed 20 chips, each representing 5% of their total weight of belief on the probability that a typical patient with moderate-severe early RA would have an ACR50 response within 6 months with MTX (oral and s.c.), MTX + HCQ (dual therapy) and triple therapy. Parametric distributions were fit, and used to calculate pairwise median relative risks (RR), with 95% credible intervals, and estimate sample sizes for new trials to shift these beliefs.ResultsIn the pooled analysis, triple therapy was perceived to be superior to MTX (RR 1.97; 1.35, 2.89) and dual therapy (RR 1.32; 1.03, 1.73). A pessimistic subgroup (n = 10) perceived all treatments to be similar, whereas an optimistic subgroup (n = 10) believed triple therapy to be most effective of all (RR 4.03; 2.22, 10.12). Similar variability was seen for the comparison between oral and s.c. MTX. Assuming triple therapy is truly more effective than MTX, a trial of 100 patients would be required to convince the pessimists; if triple therapy truly has no-modest effect (RR <1.5), a non-inferiority trial of 475 patients would be required to convince the optimists.ConclusionRheumatologists' beliefs regarding the effectiveness of triple therapy vary, which may partially explain the variability in its use. Owing to the strength of beliefs, some may be reluctant to shift, even with new evidence.
| S-EPMC8328501 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSimilar outcomes have been observed between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) responding to tocilizumab (TCZ) with methotrexate (MTX) who discontinued vs. continued MTX and between patients receiving MTX who added TCZ vs. switched to TCZ monotherapy. This study examined MTX discontinuation and dose decreases in patients with RA initiating TCZ in a real-world setting.MethodsTCZ-naïve patients enrolled in the Corrona RA registry who initiated TCZ in combination with MTX and had a 6-month follow-up visit without TCZ discontinuation were included. Patients were grouped by MTX dose at the time of TCZ initiation (≤ 10 mg, > 10 to ≤ 15 mg, > 15 to ≤ 20 mg, > 20 mg). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with changes in MTX use at 6 months, with a secondary analysis at 12 months. Changes in disease activity [Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)] and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6 and 12 months were summarized descriptively.ResultsOf 444 included patients, 82.7% were female and 83.7% white, with mean (SD) disease duration of 11.6 (9.3) years, baseline CDAI score of 24.0 (15.4), and baseline MTX dose of 17.7 (5.8) mg. At 6 months, 139 patients (31.3%) discontinued or decreased their MTX dose. All MTX dose groups and patients who discontinued, decreased, maintained, or increased their MTX dose displayed improvements in CDAI scores and PROs at 6 months. Similar patterns and results were observed at 12 months.ConclusionsA considerable proportion of patients initiating TCZ discontinued or decreased their MTX dose after TCZ initiation. Improvements in disease activity and functionality were observed in patients who decreased or stopped MTX. This real-world study confirmed prior observations that discontinuing or decreasing MTX may be a treatment strategy for patients initiating TCZ combination therapy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01402661.
| S-EPMC7211217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To compare the effectiveness and safety of three non-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) ? inhibitors (rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN:Population based prospective study. SETTING:53 university and 54 non-university clinical centres in France. PARTICIPANTS:3162 adults (>18 years) with rheumatoid arthritis according to 1987 American College of Rheumatology criteria, enrolled in one of the three French Society of Rheumatology registries; who had no severe cardiovascular disease, active or severe infections, or severe immunodeficiency, with follow-up of at least 24 months. INTERVENTION:Initiation of intravenous rituximab, abatacept, or tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:The primary outcome was drug retention without failure at 24 months. Failure was defined as all cause death; discontinuation of rituximab, abatacept, or tocilizumab; initiation of a new biologic or a combination of conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs; or increase in corticosteroid dose >10 mg/d compared with baseline at two successive visits. Because of non-proportional hazards, treatment effects are presented as life expectancy difference without failure (LEDwf), which measures the difference between average duration of survival without failure. RESULTS:Average durations of survival without failure were 19.8 months for rituximab, 15.6 months for abatacept, and 19.1 months for tocilizumab. Average durations were greater with rituximab (LEDwf 4.1, 95% confidence interval 3.1 to 5.2) and tocilizumab (3.5, 2.1 to 5.0) than with abatacept, and uncertainty about tocilizumab compared with rituximab was substantial (-0.7, -1.9 to 0.5). No evidence was found of difference between treatments for mean duration of survival without death, presence of cancer or serious infections, or major adverse cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION:Among adults with refractory rheumatoid arthritis followed-up in routine practice, rituximab and tocilizumab were associated with greater improvements in outcomes at two years compared with abatacept.
| S-EPMC6344892 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare retention of tocilizumab (TCZ) as monotherapy vs combination therapy with MTX in RA patients achieving clinical improvements during the first year.MethodsWe performed a multicentre cohort study using a real-life registry containing RA patients who had begun TCZ with or without MTX between April 2008 and November 2016. Among patients with ≥50% improvement of clinical disease activity index (CDAI) during the first year (CDAI50 responders), we evaluated whether MTX use may have affected TCZ discontinuation during the second and subsequent years (maintenance therapy).ResultsAmong 510 patients with high or moderate CDAI, 328 (64.3%) were CDAI50 responders. The rate of MTX use was 53.0% among responders and 54.4% among non-responders. During maintenance therapy (mean follow-up 30.7 months), 43.9% of CDAI50 responders discontinued TCZ. The most common cause was efficacy loss followed by adverse events. Kaplan-Meier estimates for TCZ retention were 48.3 months (95% CI 42.0, 54.5) for monotherapy and 50.0 months (95% CI 45.9, 54.0) for combination therapy. According to Gray's test, there was no significant impact of MTX use on cumulative incidence of efficacy loss or adverse events. In the Fine-Gray competing risk regression model, CDAI >10 at the start of maintenance therapy and age were predictive factors for TCZ discontinuation due to efficacy loss (hazard ratio 2.58, 95% CI 1.41, 4.72) and adverse events (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1.01, 1.08), respectively.ConclusionThere was no significant difference in TCZ retention between monotherapy and combination therapy with MTX.
| S-EPMC6587922 | biostudies-literature